THEY ARE CONTENT IN THAT ROLE

THE POINT IS: GOOD TO THE GOOD, BAD TO THE BAD

PROMOTE THE EXCELLENT

FINANCE IS ONE WAY, BUT ARISTOCRACY IS BETTER

how is dumping money on geniuses so they have more kids not excellent

THEY ARE UNLIKELY TO HAVE KIDS ANYWAY

"you have 150IQ points, great health and good looks, have kids"

AND

BETTER SYSTEM IS GRANTS FROM ARISTOCRATS

pay them specifically to have kids

GIVE TO THOSE WHO DEMONSTRATE ABILITY

NOT JUST RAW INTELLIGENCE

where will the money for grants come from

ARISTOCRATS OWN LAND AND PROPERTIES

THEY HAVE YEARLY INCOME

AND GIVE SOME OF IT IN GRANTS

MUCH LIKE WAS USED TO FUND CLASSICAL MUSIC

so take what poor people make, redistribute it

AND MUCH OF CLASSICAL LITERATURE

sounds like taxation by another name

POOR PEOPLE MAKE LITTLE

then what is the point of capitalism

THEY CAN BE USED TO MAKE MONEY

BUT BY THEMSELVES, MAKE LITTLE

CAPITALISM = MARKET ECONOMY VS. COMMAND ECONOMY

ALLOW THE BEST TO RISE

okay

THEN ALLOCATE THAT TO ARISTOCRATS

FOR EXAMPLE

GIVE GOOGLE TO THE DUKE OF EDINBOROUGH

let people have a mostly free market, take away a lot of their money and redistribute it based on genes

BETTER THAN LETTING IT STRUGGLE ON ITS OWN

THAT IS WHAT IT MEANS TO BALANCE CAPITALISM WITH ARISTOCRACY, CASTE AND CULTURE

ALSO

NO CONSUMERISM

LET HIGHER CASTES CHOOSE WHAT SUCCEEDS

MUCH OF THE PROBLEM WITH "CAPITALISM" NOW IS THAT DALITS ARE CHOOSING SUCCESSFUL PRODUCTS

so command economy

TWITTER AT $8BN

NO, THE OPPOSITE

SEE WHAT SUCCEEDS, THEN ALLOCATE